Background/Objectives: To perform a physicochemical characterization of urine and sediment in intermittent catheterization (IC) users and evaluate the impact of IC with micro-hole zone catheters (MHZC) and conventional two-eyelet catheters (CEC). Methods: Analysis of anonymized urine samples collected from four IC user groups with lower urinary tract dysfunction (LUTD): Newly diagnosed individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) from an inpatient SCI clinic (A), and community-based IC users with SCI (B), multiple sclerosis (MS) (C), or other conditions than SCI or MS (D). Urine analysis included physicochemical properties, bacterial load, and sediment size, both after collection and following passage through MHZC and CEC. Results: Urine samples from 53 participants were analyzed (groups A: 11, B: 11, C: 9, D: 22). The physicochemical properties of urine were similar to reference values despite the prevalence of bacteriuria ranging from 54.5% to 77.3%. The median [99th percentile] sediment size in the total group was 8.6 µm [50.7 µm] and 8.5 µm [54.1 µm] for group A, 9.2 µm [40.3 µm] for group B, 7.9 µm [48.3 µm] for group C, and 8.9 µm [50.3 µm] for group D. Following catheter passage, the median sediment size for the total group was 8.9 µm with the MHZC and 8.9 µm with the CEC. Conclusions: This two-part study initially presented a novel approach to characterizing urine samples, including sediment from IC users, and, thereafter, an in vitro experiment using the samples to test sediment passage through MHZC and CEC. The results indicated similar urine properties and sediment sizes across groups and did not suggest differences or issues relating to urine and sediment passage through these IC technologies for these groups.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess sediments in complicated and uncomplicated urine samples and the ability of conventional and micro-hole intermittent catheters to drain these sediments. DESIGN: Randomized, single-blinded, cross-over study. SUBJECTS AND SETTING: Adult healthy volunteers (male and female) and patients regularly using intermittent catheterization were enrolled. Urine samples from these study participants were collected with a conventional eyelet catheter and a micro-hole zone catheter, on separate days. In addition, complicated urine samples defined as urine containing large numbers of visible casts and mucus collected from patients visiting a urology department in Copenhagen Denmark were collected with a conventional catheter with extra-large eyelets. METHODS: All urine samples from patients and healthy volunteers were analyzed within 48 hours of collection. The number and size distribution of sediments in uncomplicated urine was evaluated using automated light microscopy. Sediments in complicated urine also were assessed with conventional light microscopy. Laboratory-based drainage tests were performed for complicated urine using both types of catheters. RESULTS: Similar types of sediments were found in all urine samples, with sizes from 2 to 195 μm in clear urine and 2 to 131 μm in cloudy urine. More sediments were found in cloudy and complicated urine compared with clear samples. In complicated urine, the number of sediments in some instances was large enough to obstruct flow in some micro-hole catheters, and a few conventional catheters as well. CONCLUSIONS: Most urine samples can be successfully drained through micro-hole zone catheters, but care should be exercised in recommending these catheters to patients with complicated urine, containing large numbers of visible sediments.